ASUS' VA278Q: 27-inch 2560 x 1440 IPS Display Due Out This Year
by Anand Lal Shimpi on January 9, 2012 6:32 PM EST- Posted in
- Trade Shows
- Displays
- Asus
- CES
- CES 2012
ASUS just showed me their first 27-inch 2560 x 1440 IPS panel (pictured above). Pricing and availability are both unknowns although I am hearing 2H 2012 may be likely for the display. There are VGA, DL-DVI, DP and HDMI inputs of course. The panel can be rotated 90 degrees as well.
We'll keep you posted as ASUS finalizes details on the VA278Q.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
46 Comments
View All Comments
cactusdog - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
IPS is at the end of the road, 2012 is the year for OLED and will make IPS look like junk.werfu - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
Maybe, but for tenfold the price of the IPS panel.FaaR - Friday, January 13, 2012 - link
OLED suffers from burn-in (or rather, pixel wear). Good luck watching movies with shadows of your browser window, task bar and desktop icons constantly floating in your field-of-view... Lol.I'll stick to my LCD screen, thankyouverymuch. ;)
Bigginz - Wednesday, January 18, 2012 - link
Market research firm DisplaySearch says that OLEDs currently only amount to 4 percent of the display market, but will rise to a substantial 16 percent by 2018.Quote from another article.
http://www.dailytech.com/article.aspx?newsid=23796
I wish you were right about OLED's taking over in 2012 but the technology is not mature yet. It's going to take years for prices to come down to compete with LCD's.
DParadoxx - Monday, January 9, 2012 - link
Please let us know if there are any new 30'' 16:10 displays. This 16:9 trash has got to go.Margalus - Monday, January 9, 2012 - link
16x10 has to go. 16x9 is what should be the standard..palladium - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
I agree with DParadoxx. 16:9 is only good for movies, everything else - gaming, browsing, document viewing/writing is better off on 16:10. Unfortunately the price gap between 2560*1440 screens and 30" 1560*1600 is too wide to justify the latter. Sigh.B3an - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
Er no. 16:10 is superior for actually doing... work. You know, what most people actually use these higher end displays for.16:9 is only good for watching movies and maybe gaming. Literally everything else, even browsing the web, is worse on 16:9 because of less vertical space.
Haydon - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
Technically 3:2 (or 15:10 for comparison purposes) is the optimal ratio for the human field of vision, so both 16:9 and 16:10 fail somewhat, though 16:10 is closer.Penti - Tuesday, January 10, 2012 - link
Just buy a tv if you like 16:9, for work and computer use the added vertical space is much appreciated. It's even needed many times and pretty much essential in tablets now days. Navigation/buttons won't leave much vertical space otherwise.